Have something to say?

Ready to be published? LXer is read by around 350,000 individuals each month, and is an excellent place for you to publish your ideas, thoughts, reviews, complaints, etc. Do you have something to say to the Linux community?

Who's worse? NSA or Google?

I can't afford a Nest, but now that Google has acquired it, I wouldn't take one even as a gift. This is a truly scary trend. 1984/THX1138 will not exist via video cameras, but EDRs (event data recorders) and everyone from municipal agencies to medical, insurance, energy companies, etc, will have access to your data. Were you acting responsibly when that fire started in your home? Your explanation won't be worth spit compared to an insurance company's paid professionals interpreting your hard data.

I hope this may launch a very necessary trend, one that pointedly eschews the acquisition of "smart" (read networked) devices. I know I certainly have no desire of being ratted out by my toaster. More than ever, I'm reminded of that saying: "Am I paranoid? Not nearly enough". Excuse me while go put a .45 hardball thru my Nook. ;)

Do you honestly believe you have a choice with current products? That the new cage yer driving is not crawling with EDRs, already? You think the insurance industry is not lobbying like crazy to make it mandatory they insinuate tattle-tale devices into every potential litigation application available to them? Sure, courts ruled in favor of secreted GPS units in rental cars, but how long do you think that will last in this "for national security" climate?

I'm jes saying if it can happen, it probably will. One should be damn cynical about what the reasons are for imbedding networking devices in common appliances. That it's "for your benefit" sounds damn suspect, to me.

>> But none of this has anything to do with Google. They sell targeted advertising. Simply block or ignore their ads, and you're not funding them.

Getting back more specifically than funding to the related issue of legal/illegal surveillance when comparing who's worse, I'm more worried that sometime soon -- if they haven't done so already -- Google will increasingly open the floodgates to spammers and ID thieves for those who merely even ATTEMPT to block both their ads and their surveillance. Let's face it, Google's ALREADY let the genie out of bottle by opening themselves up to the NSA's supposedly "legal" user-info requests!! Why stop now??

That''s an understandable concern, flufferbeer. But again, that has nothing to do with funding Google involuntarily. As a taxpaying US citizen, you fund the NSA whether you want to or not. You can do your absolute best to ensure Google never sees a penny of your money, or even that you're a net drain on their coffers fi you want.

>> But again, that has nothing to do with funding Google involuntarily.

But I'm primarily judging Google as worse coming from the invariable AFTERFFECTS of legal/illegal surveillance, not so much as much funding involuntarily drawn straight to Google. Although I beg to differ in that Google COULD somehow benefit fund$-wise by allowing spammers and ID thieves more leeway in gaining eventual lucrative acce$$ to more of their wealthier victims. Hah, maybe tinfoil-hat me!